Trouble logging in?If you can't remember your password or are having trouble logging in, you will have to reset your password. If you have trouble resetting your password (for example, if you lost access to the original email address), please do not start posting with a new account, as this is against the forum rules. If you create a temporary account, please contact us right away via Forum Support, and send us any information you can about your original account, such as the account name and any email address that may have been associated with it.

well obviously studio already use computer to make lighting. but using 3D->2D thing. we maybe can see more gradual or moving shadow.

you can see the shadow there is "static" most of the lighting is just gradual from light to dark.

by using 3D animation. we can see directly how changing the light source position and brightness will effect the shadow on the character. those make the shadow look and move more realistically with little of effort. since you just fiddle around with the "lamp" and computer do the rest.

5:34 onwards, I consider this to be one of the greatest tones ever for a guitar. I'm not even that big on Pink Floyd but this sound is just hypnotizing and it's something I've never ever been able to recreate, no matter how much I change amps and alter sounds through DAWs. It's also individually specific, which is why art forms are so unique.

I get what you're saying, we can buy amps, guitars, picks, strings
But we won't be able to buy David Gilmour's fingers, who can coax sounds out of those technical items we can't replicate ourselves, even using the same gear

But let's be honest: there are people coaxing certain things out of a computer we can't replicate either
CGI or not, it still has human input, and if I have tools available to make a computer image more 'imperfect' and I use them in 'my' way, we're gonna see that individual 'human' style
all it needs is something emulating tiny discrepancies to make things look 'real'

David Gilmour on a modeling amp -especially the later generations- IS gonna sound like David Gilmour

Do you think that, in the future, the majority of anime will be CGI like American animation?

It won't, and I'll be happy it won't; at least not for the foreseeable future. While I like 3D CG to an extent, I think that more effort should be made to employ it better as opposed to employing it more. The characteristic look and feel of anime was largely derived from the way animators dealt with the limitations, technical and otherwise, of traditional hand-drawn animation. 3D CG has very different limitations, so the skills that were developed for the older form aren't very useful for the newer one.

What this means is that the skills that go into traditional hand-drawn work do not translated to 3D CG. This also means that the kind of art designs that look good in one form don't necessarily do so in the other. And so 3D art tends to go away from some of the unique stylings of anime.

If the Japanese animators were pouring large amounts of money into developing lots of new techniques, that would be one thing, but it seems that most of the 3D CG artists are gravitating towards games instead of anime. And so, what 3D CG works exist tend to look a lot worse than their Western counterparts. Those animators have gotten better, but they're still far short of where I'd like to see them.

In some places, 3D CG work has largely displaced the traditional forms. This is perhaps most apparent in mechanical work where it's very rare to see hand-drawn cars anymore. It's a shame because the 3D versions often don't look very good. And that's where a lot of the problem lies: 3D work that doesn't blend very well with the 2D art, or just awkward looking 3D works.

The places I think that 3D works better is to simplify 2D techniques which would be time-consuming to use or to create the kind of animation that's effectively impossible in 2D. A good example of the former is Girls und Panzer. The show could have used hand-drawn tanks but that would have been extremly labor intensive, making the show too expensive to produce.

__________________

The victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won...

-"Animation was filmed using motion capture technology. 1,327 scenes in total needed to be filmed to animate the digital characters.
The film consists of 141,964 frames, with each frame taking an average of 90 minutes to render.
By the end of production Square had a total of 15 terabytes of artwork for the film.
It is estimated that over the film's four-year production, approximately 200 people working on it put in a combined 120 years of work."

-"It was the first photorealistic computer animated feature film and also holds the record for the most expensive video game-inspired film ever made."

bump this thread because exceptional performance of Arpeggio of Blue Steel

so Arpeggio of Blue Steel is full 3D CG TV anime. first episode is bit strange and need to get used with it. but once you comfort with it. it doesn't feel strange anymore. in fact first episode is the worst episode in term of animation and CG model.

heck i will argue that full 3D CG anime is better than 3D mixed with 2D animation. it surprisingly feel natural

it sold well too, breaking 10K barrier. I guess 3D anime is not consider "bad" to japanese standard at least. one would argue it mainly because kancolle hype. but certainly full 3D CG doesn't seem affect the Arppegio in negative ways.

admittedly some studio still do porrly in CG animation and sanzigen is pretty much studio that have lot of experienced in CG anime. but I think at this point 3D CG anime is consider acceptable to most of people

There's no reason why CGI can't one day perfectly emulate 2D animation. Though, much like people who pretend perfectly synthesized music is worse than "real" music (it's too perfect, no soul, blah blah), there will still be people pretending CGI is the work of the devil.

Personally, I've never had a problem with CGI. I'm not too familiar with the costs involved, but I've always presumed it's far more expensive than "2D" (is that even the proper term, as I can't see what dimensionality has to do with any of this), or we'd see more anime done in the style of Square Enix cinematics, which is why I'm confused when people say CGI is the future due to lower production costs...

Evolved, yet mixed feelings on this. 3d is 3d, 2d is 2d. The exact nature of a free sketch on paper is never gonna be replaced by pixels and polygons at a core level.

Mind you, I am MUCH more inviting and accepting of 3D then I was years ago (love non-Shrek Dreamworks and Illumination Mac Guff work), when idiots like Katzenberg were saying "2D is dead" as far as American films go. Uh oh, getting angry again.

Anyways, keeping cool, what grounds 2d in Japan IMHO is the manga industry. That 2D style of art leads to an expectation of traditional animation, which I believe will be the principle mode of animation production (for both tv and films) until the Japanese audience tastes change or some other market forces essentially FORCE the switch over to 3d.

I am interested in the work that Toei is doing with 3d though. I wanna see that new Saint Seiya film and I don't even LIKE Saint Seiya!

As for us in the states. I am dissapointed with Lassater at Disney. He said that 2d is back yet nothing is in the pipeline. The reason the 3d movies worked is cause they were appealing movies, not necessarily cause they were in 2d OR 3d. I wish Hollywood would realize this but oh well....